The correct name for the Tetrastigma (Vitaceae) host of Rafflesia (Rafflesiaceae) in Malesiaand a (not so) new species

2008·0.31 MB·English

by  Veldkamp, Jan Frits

A JOURNAL ON TAXONOMIC BOTANY,
PLANT SOCIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
LIPI
12(4)
REINWARDTIA
A JOURNAL ON TAXONOMIC BOTANY,
PLANT SOCIOLOGY AND ECOLOGY
Vol. 12(4): 261 - 337, 31 March 2008
Editors
ELIZABETH A. WIDJAJA, MIEN A. RIFAI, SOEDARSONO RISWAN, JOHANIS P. MOGEA
Correspondece on The Reinwardtia journal and subscriptions should be addressed to
HERBARIUM BOGORIENSE, BIDANG BOTANI, PUSAT PENELITIAN BIOLOGI - LIPI,
BOGOR, INDONESIA

REINWARDTIA
Vol 12, Part 4, pp: 261 - 265
THE CORRECT NAME FOR THE TETRASTIGMA (VITACEAE) HOST OF
RAFFLESIA (RAFFLESIACEAE) IN MALESIA AND A (NOT SO) NEW
SPECIES
Received September 25, 2007; accepted October 11, 2007.
J.F. VELDKAMP
Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Universiteit Leiden Branch, P.O. Box 9514, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands.
e-mail:[email protected]
ABSTRACT
VELDKAMP, J.F. 2008. The correct name for the Tetrastigma (Vitaceae) host of Rafflesia (Rafflesiaceae) in Malesia
and a (not so) new species. Reinwardtia 12(4): 261 – 265. –– The correct name for Tetrastigma lanceolarium auct.
non Planch. or T. leucostaphylum (Dennst.) Alston ex Mabb. (Vitaceae) in Malesia is T. rafflesiae Miq. The name T.
lawsonii is superfluous and has been misapplied to a species here described as new.
Key words: Rafflesia, Tetrastigma, Malesia
ABSTRAK
VELDKAMP, J.F. 2008. Nama tepat untuk Tetrastigma (Vitaceae) tumbuhan inang Rafflesia (Rafflesiaceae) di Malesia,
dan suatu jenis (yang tidak terlalu) baru. Reinwardtia 12(4): 261 – 265. –– Nama yang benar untuk Tetrastigma
lanceolarium auct. non Planch. atau T. leucostaphylum (Dennst.) Alston ex Mabb. (Vitaceae) di Malesia adalah T.
rafflesiae Miq. Nama T. lawsonii adalah berlebihan dan telah disalahgunakan pada jenis yang di sini dipertelakan
sebagai jenis baru.
Kata kunci: Rafflesia, Tetrastigma, Malesia
INTRODUCTION basionyms should be legitimate and, if not, their
epithets can only be used again (without ascription)
It is well-known that Rafflesia spp. in a different combination if there is no alternative
(Rafflesiaceae), native to Malesia, parasitise species at that rank.
of Tetrastigma Planch. (Vitaceae), especially one
that has been known under various names, usually 58.1. The epithet in an illegitimate name if available may
T. lanceolarium (Roxb.) Planch. and more recently be used in a different combination, at the same or
T. leucostaphylum (Dennst.) Alston ex Mabb. a different rank, if no other epithet is available from
However, the latter is a species from Bangladesh, a name that has priority at that rank. The resulting
name is then treated as new, either as a nomen
Bhutan, India, and Nepal, the first is a superfluous
novum with the same type as the illegitimate name
name for it, misapplied to T. nilagiricum (Miq.) B.V.
(see also Art. 7.5 and Art. 33 Note 2), or as the
Shetty, a South Indian/ Sri Lanka species (Shetty
name of a new taxon with a different type. Its
& Singh 2000). Latiff (2001) regarded these as
priority does not date back to the publication of
synonymous.
the illegitimate name.
In his paper he tried to sort out the
nomenclature of the Malesian species and
Since Latiff cited four legitimate synonyms,
concluded that the correct name should be T.
he should have selected one of these for the correct
tuberculatum (Blume) Latiff. I have here relied on
name, and the combination he made is therefore
his synonymy.
superfluous.
Unfortunately, this was not the end of the quest:
the name has to be changed again, for its Javanese
basionym, Cissus tuberculata Blume (1825), is a
TETRASTIGMA TUBERCULATUM [Blume]
later homonym of the South American C.
Latiff
tuberculata Jacq. (1797) (See also King 1896).
The International Code of Botanical
Fol. Malays. 2 (2001) 186, nom. superfl. — Cissus
Nomenclature (ICBN, 2006) requires that
tuberculata Blume, Bijdr. 4 (1825) 1899, non Jacq.
261
262 REINWARDTIA [VOL.12
(1797). — Vitis tuberculata [Blume] M.A. Lawson in
Latiff mentioned as the type “Java, Bogor,
Hook. f., Fl. Brit. India 1 (1875) 656, pro comb., nom.
Blume s.n. (L)”, apparently selecting between the
legit.! — Vitis lawsonii King, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 65, 2
syntypes indicated by Blume: “Buitenzorg et
(1896) 394 (“lawsoni”), pro comb., nom. superfl. —
Tetrastigma lawsonii [King] [Herb. Kew ex Burkill, Dict. Tjanjor”. However, in L there is no specimen from
Econ. Prod. Mal. Penins. 2 (1935) 2245, in syn.; Burkill “Buitenzorg” (Bogor), but there are two from the
ex A.W. Hill, Index Kew. Suppl. 9 (1938) 280, nom. Gunung (Mountain) Parang near the town “Tjanjor”
inval.] Burkill ex Latiff, Gard. Bull. Singapore 36 (1984, (Cianjur): L. sh. 897,348—8 and –14, labelled as
“1983”) 220, pro comb., nom. superfl. —Lectotype: Cissus tuberculatus by Blume. Willem Meijer, the
Blume s.n. [“G. Parang”, which is near the town
well-known Rafflesiaceae specialist, labeled both
“Tjanjor” (Cianjur) that Blume mentioned] (L, holo, sh.
as isotypes.
897,348—8), here designated, but see note.
King gave the following reasons for the name
change to “Vitis lawsonii”: “This is the plant which
NOTES. Wallich (1831—1832) used Vitis
Blume called Cissus tuberculata; but it is not the
tuberculata for his no. 6014 and like most of the
Vitis tuberculata of Wallich which becomes Vitis
names there it is a nomen nudum. In the 19th
rumicisperma, Lawson. For this species Mr.
century, however, many regarded the c. 4250 Wallich
Lawson keeps Blume’s specific name, but he
names as validly published. This error persists to
changes its generic name to Vitis – a course which
this day for they have been included without warning
I regret to be unable to follow, first because there is
or comment in the Index kewensis, now IPNI on
an earlier Cissus tuberculata than Blume’s (viz.,
the Internet.
that of Jacquin dating from the years 1797 to 1804
The combination Vitis tuberculata was
during which that author’s Hortus
therefore available for use by M.A. Lawson and is
Schoenbrunnensis was published, and which
legitimate according to Art. 58.1 since no other
therefore the plant to which any author who reduces
alternative was available. The only reference he
Cissus to Vitis ought to give the name V.
gave was to Blume’s basionym with which it is
tuberculata); second, because Blume did not call
therefore homotypic. From his words it is obvious
his plant Vitis tuberculata but Cissus tuberculata.”
that he did not intend to describe a new species. He
It will be clear that he thought that Blume’s
merely tried to match material with existing
species and that of Lawson were the same and that
literature, as we still do today, with all the dangers
the epithet “tuberculata” was inapplicable because
of that. In 1875 a Latin diagnosis or the appointment
of the homonymy and he therefore proposed
of a type were not yet required. Had Latiff cited
“lawsonii”. However, Lawson had validated the
this combination when proposing Tetrastigma
combination, because in Vitis the epithet
tuberculata, it would have been legitimate in 2001.
“tuberculata” was still available and the
But he didn’t, so it isn’t.
combination is permitted by Art. 58.1; thus, King
The only specimen Lawson cited was
was not allowed to change it and his combination
McClelland s.n. from Burma, Pegu, and he clearly
Vitis lawsonii is therefore superfluous.
based his description on that. Whether it really
As King himself was one of those who reduced
belongs to Blume’s species is an entirely different
Cissus L. to Vitis L., King here casually made the
matter, which will be discussed below.
new combination Vitis tuberculata (Jacq.) King,
Merely changing the authorship from “(Blume)
which of course is a later homonym of that of
Latiff” to “(M.A. Lawson) Latiff”, thus retaining
Lawson (1875).
the combination with the same name and type and
Gagnepain (1911) reported the presence of an
so validating the combination at a later date would
isotype of Cissus tuberculata Blume in P, with a
be a nice trick and would maintain at least the
“superb” tendril, a pedate 5-foliolate leaf, and 2 seeds
continued use of the combination itself. However,
in each berry. Unfortunately he gave no locality.
doing so would result in an isonym, a name with the
This would seem to be a much better candidate for
same combination, with the same type, but with
a lectotype, but could not be found.
different author(s), for which the ICBN (Art. 6, Note
Tetrastigma lawsonii was mentioned as a
2) states that “The name is always to be cited from
synonym of V. lawsonii by Burkill (1935) and the
its original place of valid publication”, i.e. the earliest
former name therefore is not valid. This reference
one. It does not cover the curious case where it
was copied verbatim by Hill (1938), and then still
would be the same author, but I think the meaning is
remained invalid, although from the typography it is
clear. The ICBN only in exceptional cases allows
not clear whether he regarded it as a synonym or
you to mend your ways at a later date.
an accepted name. Latiff (1984: 220) unwittingly
2008] VELDKAMP: The Tetrastigma host of Rafflesia 263
made the combination attributing it to Burkill, but as a code for this date).
he should have used “tuberculata”, it is superfluous. Backer & Bakhuizen f. (1965) ambivalently
echoed its uncertain status: “Hardly to be
The earliest synonym according to Latiff is: distinguished from the preceding species [T.
lanceolarium]; insufficiently known”.
CISSUS MUTABILIS Blume Perhaps modern analyses can solve this
problem, but they are beyond my means and powers
Bijdr. 4 (1825) 190; Miq., Fl. Ned. Indië 1, 2 (1859) and I therefore regard this name as a nomen
605. —Vitis mutabilis Miq., Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd. Bat.
dubium.
1 (1863) 75. — Tetrastigma mutabile Planch. in A. DC.,
Monogr. Phan. 5, 2 (1887) 440. — Type: “in humidis,
The next candidate, according to Latiff, is:
praecipue in calcareis provinciarum septentrionalium
Javae insulae. Floret: Julio — Sept., etc. Nomen: Aroij
kibarera”. VITIS RAFFLESIAE Miq.
NOTES. Latiff mentioned as the type: “Java, s. loc., Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd. Bat. 1 (1863) 76. —
Tetrastigma rafflesiae Planch. in DC., Monogr. Phan. 5
Blume s.n. (L)”. I have found no collections in L
(1887) 443. — Type: Korthals s.n. [L, sh. 897,348—162,
with this name so labelled by Blume himself. There
—163 (2 sheets), West Sumatra, Mt. Malintang (15 May
are two sheets (L. sh. 897,348—44, —45) on which
1835, according to Korthals’s unpublished diary in the
he wrote “Cissus montana Bl. 747”, an unpublished
archives of L)].
name. To the first Blume added on the label “Salak
Decbr.”, which is in conflict with the flowering NOTES. In Leiden there are only three sheets under
period he mentioned. On the second sheet Meijer this name. Although Miquel described floral parts,
added “Type. Tetrastigma mutabilis” in February these collections have no inflorescences. However,
1981. Neither sheet was labelled by Latiff. Miquel the pieces of stem have the typical small tubercles.
(1863) proposed “Vitis mutabilis Miq.” The derivation of the epithet seems obvious: a
Both sheets contain only loose leaflets, a few Rafflesia must have been found on it. Unfortunately,
petioles, and one piece of stem, which is not Korthals in his diary was more interested in the
tuberculate, but completely smooth. One can only growth of the Rafflesia than in what he called
hope that all came from the same plant. Cissus.
Miquel (1859) more or less extracted his In L there are three drawings of R. hasseltii
diagnosis from Blume’s description and in 1863 Suringar in the Korthals Icones collection (L sh.
complained that there was too little material to 941,23—19, —20, —21). It is tempting to think that
identify the name properly: “Specimina suppetentia they depict the specimen after which the species
prorsus manca, cirrhis floribusque plane was named. Meijer (in Latiff, 1984) said that this is
deficientibus. V(itis) landuk accedere videtur. Pauca the commonest host for this species.
itaque habeo quae diagnosi citata addam. Stigmatis Latiff labelled all three herbarium sheets
forma et seminum numerus characteres essentiales merely as “Tetrastigma” and in 2001 cited as the
praebere videntur”. My translation: “The specimens type Korthals s.n. xi/63. I have found no such a
available surely are incomplete, with the tendrils note (“xi/63”) on any label, possibly it is an error
and flowers being totally absent. It seems close to for “163”. He also said “s. loc.”, which is correct
V. landuk. I have therefore little to add to the as far as the labelling goes, but Miquel said it came
diagnosis cited. The form of the stigma and the from West Sumatra, Mt. Malintang, again
number of seeds seem to provide the essential information that may have been lost in the
characters”. remounting. Meijer added to this on one of the -
Except for Miquel’s labeling there is no 163 sheets: “G(unung = mountain) Malintang,
indication at all that this is Blume’s original material where R. arnoldii is rather common”.
of Cissus mutabilis. There may have been some note I therefore conclude that the host of Rafflesia
to this effect on the original covers in 1862, when should have the most appropriate name: Tetrastigma
Miquel became Director of the Rijksherbarium and rafflesiae (Miq.) Planch.
had to clean up an awful mess, but these were not
included when the specimens were remounted on The later synonyms Latiff provided then are
17 December 1897 (the Leiden sheet numbers are of lesser interest.
264 REINWARDTIA [VOL.12
VITIS KUNSTLERI King
Tendrils absent to few. Petioles 2.2—4.3 cm
long. Leaflets 3, coriaceous, base decurrent,
J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 65, 2 (1896) 396. —
underneath glabrous; terminal leaflet 10.7—13.8 cm
Tetrastigma kunstleri Craib, Fl. Siam Enum. 1 (1926)
long. Inflorescences subsessile. Flowers flat-topped,
313. — Lectotype: King’s Collector 8027 (CAL, holo;
glabrous. Stigmas-lobes pointed, glabrous. Berries
K, SING), Malay Peninsula, Perak, Larut, near Batang
1—3 per infructescence, globose, 1.7—2 cm diam.,
Padang River, designated here.
yellow. Seeds 3 or 4, oblong; testa smooth;
endosperm M-shaped in transverse section.
TETRASTIGMA ENCEPHALOSPERMUM Ridl.
HABIT. Lowland forest margins.
Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1926 (1926) 62. — Type:
SF 14643 (Boden Kloss) (K, holo; SING), Sumatra, DISTRIBUTION. Burma (Pegu = Myanmar, Bago),
Mentawai Arch., Sipora Isl. Malay Peninsula (Kedah, Penang, Perak, Selangor),
Singapore, Sumatra (Aceh).
NOTES. The island of Sipora is not in Sarawak.
The collector is Boden Kloss, not Ridley. EPONYMY. With pleasure I dedicate this species
to the long-time student of the family and genus in
SE Asia, my good friend Prof. Dato’ Dr. Abdul Latiff
Mohamad.
A NEW SPECIES
NOTES. The diagnosis above is based on the
As stated above, the only specimen Lawson
descriptions by Lawson (1875), Gagnepain (1911),
cited under V. tuberculata was McClelland s.n. The
Ridley (1922), Suessenguth (1953), and Latiff
name may have been misapplied, but as can be seen
(1984), which all clearly refer to the same species.
from the descriptions subsequent authors since 1875
The earliest specimen mentioned that belongs
have recognized it as a distinct species. I hope to
here is McClelland s.n.. As it was only a voucher
have shown above that the epithet “lawsonii” cannot
for V. tuberculata, and not its type I felt free to
be used because it was published as a superfluous
appoint the collection selected by Latiff who was
name for V. tuberculata Lawson, which causes this
under the impression that T. lawsonii had not been
not-so-new species to be without one. Still, the ICBN
typified.
requires one to describe it as new.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Tetrastigma latiffii Veldk., spec. nov.
I am very grateful to Dr. J. Skornickova for checking the
Tetrastigma lawsonii auct. non Latiff: [Herb. Kew
SING holdings to find relevant specimens.
ex Burkill, Dict. Econ. Prod. Mal. Penins. 2 (1935) 2245,
in syn.; Burkill ex A.W. Hill, Index Kew. Supp. 9 (1938)
280.] Burkill ex Latiff, Gard. Bull. Singapore 36 (1984, REFERENCES
“1983”) 220, pro specim.
Vitis lawsonii auct. non King: King, J. Asiat. Soc. BACKER, C.A. & R.C. BAKHUIZEN VAN DEN
Bengal 65, 2 (1896) 394 (“lawsoni”), pro specim. BRINK F. 1965. Flora of Java 1: 89. Noordhoff,
Vitis tuberculata auct. non M.A. Lawson: M.A. Groningen
Lawson in Hook. f., Fl. Brit. India 1 (1875) 656, pro BLUME, C.L. 1825. Bijdragen tot de flora van
specim. Nederlandsch Indië 4:189—191. Lands Drukkerij,
Batavia.
Cirri desunt vel pauci. Petioli 2.2—4.3 cm longi, BURKILL, I.H. 1935. A dictionary of the economic
foliola 3 coriacea, basi decurrenti, subtus glabra, products of the Malay Peninsula 2: 2245. Crown
terminalia 10.7—13.8 cm longa. Inflorescentiae Agents for he Colonies, London.
subsessiles. Flores glabris apice plano. Stigmatis lobi GAGNEPAIN, F. 1911. Essai de classification du genre
acuminati glabri. Infrutescentia baccis 1—3 globosis Tetrastigma. In H. Lecomte, Not. Sys. 1: 320—321.
1.7—2 cm in diam. luteis. Semina 3 vel 4 oblonga testa GILG, E. 1896. Vitaceae, in Engl. & Prantl, Nat. Pfl.-
laevi endospermio M-formi in sect. transv. — Type: Fam. 5 (3): 427—454. Engelmann, Leipzig.
King’s Collector 6287 (CAL, holo; BM, K, L, SING), HILL, A.W. 1938. Index Kewensis, Supplementum 9: 280.
Malay Peninsula, Perak, Larut. Clarendon, Oxford.
2008] VELDKAMP: The Tetrastigma host of Rafflesia 265
JACQUIN, N.J. 1797. Plantarum rariorum horti caesari 1, 2: 604—605. Van der Post, Amsterdam, Utrecht.
Schoenbrunnensis descriptiones et icones. Pl. Hort. MIQUEL, F.A.W. 1863. Ampelideae novae. Ann. Mus.
Schoenbr. 1: 14, t. 32. Wappler, Vienna; etc. Bot. Lugd. Bat. 1:75.
KING, G. 1896. Materials for a flora of the Malayan PLANCHON, J.E. 1887. Monographie des Ampélidées
Peninsula 3. J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal 65 (2): 394—395. varies. In A. & C. DC. Monogr. Phan. 5: 440441.
LATIFF, A. 1984, “1983”. Studies in Malesian Vitaceae Masson, Paris.
VII. The genus Tetrastigma in the Malay Peninsula. SHETTY, B.V. & Par. Singh. 2005. Vitaceae. Fl. India
Gard. Bull. Singapore 36: 217—218, 220—223. 5: 314—315. Botanical Survey of India, Calcutta.
LATIFF, A. 2001. Studies in Malesian Vitaceae XII: RIDLEY, H.N. 1922. The flora of the Malay Peninsula.
taxonomic notes on Cissus, Ampelocissus, 1: 474—475. Reeve & Co., London.
Nothocissus and Tetrastigma and other genera. Fl. SUESSENGUTH, K. 1953. Vitaceae. In Engl. & Prantl,
Malays. 2: 185—187. Nat. Pfl.-Fam. 20d: 325. Duncker & Humblot,
LAWSON, M.A. 1875. Ampelideae. In J.D. Hooker. Fl. Berlin.
Brit. India 1: 656—657. Reeve & Co., Brook nr WALLICH, N. 1831—1832. List of dried plants: no.
Ashford. 6014. London. MIQUEL, F.A.W. 1863. Ampelideae
MIQUEL, F.A.W. 1859. Flora van Nederlandsch Indië novae. Ann. Mus. Bot. Lugd. Bat. 1:75.
INSTRUCTION TO AUTHORS Taxonomic keys should be prepared using the
aligned-couplet type.
Strict adherence to the International Code of
Manuscripts intended for publication in Botanica Monenclatural is observed, so that
Reinwardtia should be written either in English, French taxonamix and nomenclatural novelties sholud be
or German, and represent articles wich have not been clearly shown, Latin description for new taxon
published in any other journal or proceedings. Each proposed should be provided, and the herbaria where
manuscript received will be considered and processes type specimens are deposited should be indicated.
further if it is accompanied by signed statements given Synonyms should be presented in the long form [name
independently by two reviewers chosen by the author of taxon, author's name, year of publication,
(s) attestingto its merits as well as its scientific abbreviated journal or book title, volume (number):
suitability for publication in Reinwardtia. [page].
Two printed copies (on A4 paper) of the Maps, line drawing illustrations or photographs
manuscript of not more than 200 pages should be preferably should be prepared in landscape
sent to Editors, together with an electronic copy presentation to occupy two columns. Illustrations
prepared on Word Processor computer programme must be submitted as original art accompanying, but
using Times New Romance letter type and saved as separated from the manuscript. On electronic copy,
Rich Text File must be submitted. the illistration sholud be saved in .jpg or .gif format.
Legends for illustrations must be submitted separately
For the style of presentation autohrs should follow at the end of the manuscript.
the latest issue of Reinwardtia very closely. Title of
the article should be followed by author's name and Bibliography, list of literature cited or references
mailing address and one-paragraphed abstract in follow the Harvard system.
English (with French or German abstract for paper
in french or German) of not more than 250 For each paper published author(s) will receive
words.Keywords should be given below each 25 copies of reprints free og charge, any additional
abstract, on a peparated paper author(s) sholud the copies should be ordered in advance and the author(s)
preferred running title of the article submitted. will be charged accordingly.
ISSN 0034 365 X
REINWARDTIA
Vol. 12. No. 4. 2008
CONTENTS
Page
J.F. VELDKAMP. The correct name for the Tetrastigma (Vitaceae) host of Rafflesia (Rqfflesiaeeae) in Malesia
and a (not so) new species ... 261
WJ.J.ODE WILDE &B.E.E. DUYFES. Miscellaneous South East Asian cucurbit news 267
M.A. RIFAI. Endophragmiella bogoriensis Rifai,spec. nov (Hyphomycetes) 275
M.A. RIFAI. Another note on PodoconismegaspemiaBoedijn(Hyphomycetes) 277
TOPIK HID AW; M. ITO; T. YUKAWA. The phylogenetic position of the Papuasian genus Sarcochilus R.Br.
(Orchidaceae: Aeridinae): evidence frommolecular data 281
C.E. RIDSDALE. Notes on MaiesiznNeonaucleea 285
C.E. RIDSDALE. Thorny problems in the Rubiaceae: Benkara, Fagerlindia andOxyceros 289
KUSWATAKARTAWINAIA, PURWANINGSIH, T. PARTOMIHARDJO, R. YUSUF, R. ABDULHADI, S.
RISWAN. Floristics and structure of a lowland dipterocarp forest at Wanariset Samboja, East Kalimantan,
Indonesia 301
RUGAiAH & S. SUNARTI. Two new wild species of Averrhoa (Oxalidaceae) from Indonesia 325
ATIKRETNOWATI. Anew Javanese species of Marasmius (Trichlomataceae ) 334
Reinwardtia is a LEPI acredited Journal (80/Akred-LIPI/P2MBI/5/2007)
HERBARIUM BOGORIENSE
BIDANG BOTANI ,
PUS AT PENELITIAN BIOLOGI - LIPI
BOGOR, INDONESIA